MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cerebral autoregulation is preserved in postural tachycardia syndrome

2005· article· en· W2120609490 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald Schondorf, Julie Benoit, Reuben D. Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregulationMedicineCardiologyCerebral autoregulationTachycardiaAnesthesiaInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To test whether cerebral autoregulation is impaired in patients with postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS), we evaluated 17 healthy control subjects and 27 patients with POTS. Blood pressure, heart rate, and cerebral blood velocity (transcranial Doppler) were recorded at rest and during 80 degree head-up tilt (HUT). Static cerebral autoregulation, as assessed from the change in cerebrovascular resistance during HUT, was the same in POTS and in controls. The properties of dynamic cerebral autoregulation were inferred from transfer gain, coherence, and phase of the relationship between blood pressure and cerebral blood velocity estimated from filtered data segments (0.02-0.8 Hz). Dynamic cerebral autoregulation of patients with POTS did not differ from that of controls. The patients' dynamic cerebral autoregulation did not change over the course of HUT, despite increased tachycardia suggestive of worsening orthostatic stress. Inflation of military anti-shock trouser pants substantially reduced the tachycardia of patients with POTS without affecting cerebral autoregulation. Symptoms of orthostatic intolerance were reduced in one-half of the patients following military anti-shock trouser pants inflation. We conclude that cerebral perfusion and autoregulation in many patients with POTS do not differ from that of normal control subjects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207